deptheavenfandomcom-20200214-history
Forum:Rants thread
When Sting created Yggdra Union, they had only intended it to be a simple video game. However, some fags can't let it sit at that. For example, one tcaudilllg seems obsessed with proving that the game is not so simple, perhaps in an effort to convince others (and almost certainly himself, as one could only strive in such a way if they have doubts of their own that make them feel like they're wasting their time) that these games are legitimate characters studies - they're not. Then there are people like - we'll use a code name so that we don't alienate anyone - Pheral Foenix, who can't stand that the developers had a story and characters of their own design in mind when creating the game, and seek to butcher said characters, either to indulge in sexual fantasies between the characters, or to justify the intentionally horrible acts committed by certain characters with claims that it must have been an outside influence that was evil, and clearly that outside influence - whom we know to exist but do not know - is what forced them to do such things. But everyone remotely intelligent knows that the characters have no right to pull the child abuse card, and that the characters are as simple as portrayed, and there is nothing deeper to examine. Get the fuck out. :Right, well I've got a response to this. This was somewhat uncivil, but I'll overlook it simply because light is built upon darkness. ;) :The following makes my position plain: :"I was asking myself today how it was that one could define a person by history, using it as a guide to assemble character. (a very insightful piece in Newsweek about GW Bush's failures and their relationship to his personal history brought this question into focus.) I thought, "how is it that I am able to find structure in the choices of character ideations?" Then I realized, it was because the history itself subtly implies an underlying structure. :Consider for example the explanation by an author that a man's character is disfigured because his parents thought him incapable. Is this the beginning of the story, or its climax? We assume that there is cause for the parents' labeling of their child, based on the child's behavior. To win the parents' favor, the child attempts to go out of his way to meet their expectations of him -- taking their advice to be more like them, no less -- and invariably fails. His failure is proof to his parents that he is incapable of assimilating their advice, and proof to the child that he must try harder to meet the parents on their own ground, thereby all but assuring that his next failure will be even greater than his last. The problem of this cycle -- the child's inability to meet others' expectations -- is indicative of the flaw in the child's character: he reckless attempts to acheive other's praise by being someone other than himself. Unable to be all things to all people -- and neurotically plagued by the impossibility of reconciling conflicting demands -- the child fails. It is the history of repeated character manifestation in similar circumstances which reveals the trait that points to an underlying skeletal component of his personality. :Of course, one can argue that the cycle will break once the advice of the parents is no longer available, and this is a fair assertion. However, the character trait will remanifest forthwith in a negative quality towards the advice of the parents, which in the child's eyes has failed him for so long, when next his parents attempt to impress their virtues onto him. :In summary, any pattern of behavior -- even one supposedly forged by circumstance -- may point to the existence of an as-yet unrealized structural component of personality." Tcaudilllg 08:01, 3 February 2008 (UTC) ::I like how you quoted yourself. Really shows you have a higher opinion of yourself than is justifiable. Anyways, your idea that character history has an impact on the character's current situation - while not just true but fucking obvious - is of no relevance to this endeavor of yours. 199.17.58.170 16:45, 3 February 2008 (UTC) :::That was not the idea. The idea is that one can study any character history and -- given enough circumstancial data -- identify the existence of individual traits of the character themselves. By the same token, people with different types (feeling types) are realizing character traits that were never before previously identified. (or if they were, they were not attested to) In any case, it's easier for me to recognize these traits in the exaggerated forms of a videogame, where things like special attacks can make the traits plainly evident in how they interact with the world around them, than say a movie or even a book, (with few exceptions) partly because the author's description may not fit neatly into or near to an existing theoretical framework, making it irrelevant for the time being. (and you can next to never get them out of a series of any sort, because the characters never come upon a personal climax and we don't get data besides.) Ultimately all of these traits correlate to strands of DNA that find expression in the brain. :::Now about your traits... huh... I'll bet you have a higher than average level of sympathy with Gulcasa. I can tell that you're an extroverted thinking type (probably ESTj): workaholic type who loves data. INFj is your dual, which I find perplexing because you attacked Feral Phoenix, whose type is INFj. In effect, you were shooting yourself in the foot, because INFj insight is just what you need to successfully negotiate the world's treacherous waters. I'll wager that your intolerance for others' affection is going to be your undoing... just as Gulcasa's hatred of negotiation felled him; and like Gulcasa, it won't be anyone's fault but yours. I surmise that you expect this and feel that you are a sort of "guide" or "destined antagonist" who feels that they must strive with others to reveal the stronger parts of their character. You admire purity of intention. Tcaudilllg 05:49, 4 February 2008 (UTC) ::::...You're assuming by saying these things that it's capable of feeling sympathy, or doing anything but projecting its frustrations onto other people. This is a place for airing ideas and analysis of Yggdra Union, not a place to begin flame wars. Whiny children who only insult others instead of offering insights of their own shouldn't be here. Feral Phoenix 19:00, 4 February 2008 (UTC) :Feral... You shouldn't be here then. :And tcadlilisfhggg, you can't study character history when none is given. And your claim that video games makes it easier only proves you stupider, as books are absolutely drenched with information about the characters and events. You just have to pay attention to the details (which, considering your actions here, you don't). :As for your examination of me, I have to laugh. Feral is the Gulcasa sympathizer - the only instance in which I felt sympathy for Gulcasa was when Emilia died. Workaholic is a maybe, as that's a really vague and undefined word; loves data is a no. And there's a difference between hatred of negotiation and unwillingness to compromise. 199.17.21.159 14:15, 5 February 2008 (UTC) ::OK, first up I was wrong about your type. You're not ESTj, but ISFj. I realized this when I observed that we seem to have a superego relationship; that is, we seem to be throwing up various duties "to society" as means of argument. We agree that shows of force reinforce character: this is why you disparage me for not banning you. You think I'm showing weakness, and that this weakness relects poor character on my part. Actually, I consider such questions from an abstract perspective: to me, considerations of character are contingent on the data available. A person's character is shaped by their instincts, in my view, and the question is what level of force is necessary to restrain the negative instincts. (this because, I'm an INTj who considers the use of force to regulate character the form of the superego.) ::As for your bid to make this an encyclopedia, well that's your plan to make this a more factually oriented place for your dual, eh? The problem is, ENTj doesn't really have a stake in this venture because there's not really any chance for profit (something ENTjs are very motivated by) and besides, what could they do with it? ENTjs may be intuitive, but they commit this intuition to planning and find imaginative ventures superfluous and typically irrelevant. Suffice to say, ENTjs are not playing Yggdra Union, at least not for the plot. They do make good strategists though and would be adept at making strong unions through elaborate planning. We already have Lacrima Castle and GameFAQs for game-related stuff, however, so they're unlikely to be around here except to read character analyses. (if you want to help them, you'd be better off critiquing the character flaws in the game's cast, because they would find it extremely helpful to be aware of their existance!) ::The Yggdra Union community is small; there isn't a huge cloud of enthusiasm around it compared to say, Final Fantasy or even Pokemon. This because Sting seems to have trouble keeping ISTj types. Where ISTj endevors, enthusiasm follows. As it is, Yggdra Union has just enough enthusiasm around it to tread water, which I find inviting. Now if it becomes hugely successful then I'll probably bow out and leave the scene, because too much enthusiasm for anything turns me off. ::Now about you problem with pics... this is another sign of your type. ISFj disparages introverted sensation, part of which is the appreciation of pretty images. It's actually my "hidden agenda" as an INTj: to experience pretty things and pleasant sensations, because they calm my soul. (if I had to choose between tasty food and a new game, I'd always choose the food.) Your ISFj type considers imagery unimportant and superflous to the situation, but not everyone agrees. ::You look down somewhat on Feral Phoenix because of her passion for inclusive ethics, something that you find abborent in yourself because you see it as leading to weak character. She uses it intuitively though, whereas you see it as a problem of not taking corrective action. Very big difference, with a very different result. ::Finally, you are opposed to this project because it represents +Ne: a wide field of experimentation and unproven possibilities. You find yourself using the possible only as a means of reinforcing authority: he who presents the possibilities should have the authority, you think. But, your scope of possibilities are relevant only to the situation: you discern only temporary potentials in people, potentials that are relevant to the situaiton. You see non-situation relevant potentials as threatening, because you don't pay attention to their substance... you think a strong authority should be in place to control these... dangerous potentials. ::And one more thing: our arguments over the facts are a problem of weak extroverted thinking: you acknowledge it as existing but you don't know how it got there. How do things work, and why do they work the way they do? You'd sooner leave that up to a god or gods to explain. ::And, you've the same type as the Valkyrie twins. Tcaudilllg 20:26, 5 February 2008 (UTC) :::Dear boy, stop trying to appear smarter than you are by typing more than you need. :::1: Anyone who plays ANY game for the story is an idiot. 2: I have nothing against pretty images, but what you've put up are NOT pretty and they are ridiculously artifacted, and they only serve to make the article look terrible. 3: Feral is not inclusive at all, something you'd know if you knew her. 4: I am opposed to this project because I'm against any mutual ego fellating, which (especially considering Feral is here posting her "analyses") is all this thing is about. If you claim the contrary, then you're just lying, and insinuating that you're smarter than everyone else and that you disbelieve in the average person's abilities. 5: Sure, god or gods - in the case of the games, the DEVELOPERS. I believe it was Feral who said we should have respect for the way the developers designed the characters and story... Of course, then she goes and turns Ein and Ledah gay for each other, Gulcasa and Nessiah into the victims of the story (and gay for each other, but Gulcasa also has a side thing with Yggdra)... :::Since you insist on dealing with these "types," I'll analyze you. The world frightens you. It frightens you because you don't like the random; the disorder. This is shown by your obsession with categorizing people into specific "types," and insistence on explaining the characters, and even real people (even directly to said real people), not so much to convince others as to convince yourself that the people can be organized so simply, and that the world isn't random at all, and that there's a pattern to it. Regardless of whether it is or isn't, this type of attitude leads people to one of two fates: a lifeless existence, or frenching a pistol. The former if they're lucky or stubborn and are able to keep minimizing humans by sorting them thusly, the latter when they keep encountering things that break the whole system and become to frightened with the world, or when they realize what they've become and fail to recognize that they CAN change because they still see people as "types" rather than people. The vitriol is already accumulating within you. ::::People aren't types; they have type. As for the disorder thing... yeah you've got me down pretty good. But before you pat yourself on the back, you should read a little more about INTjs, because logical types, by their very nature, hate disorder. ::::Interesting projection of your own problems onto me. What you apparently don't understand is that people who think similarly strengthen each other through friendship.... Tcaudilllg 05:44, 6 February 2008 (UTC) :::::"People aren't types" Of course they aren't; but if you know this why do you believe the contrary? I don't know what you're talking about in regards to a projection of my problems onto you, but I'm sure it's just a random, groundless jab to try and take me down a peg, anyways. 199.17.21.159 18:41, 7 February 2008 (UTC) Now that things have cooled down... let me address your issues. "4: I am opposed to this project because I'm against any mutual ego fellating, which (especially considering Feral is here posting her "analyses") is all this thing is about. If you claim the contrary, then you're just lying, and insinuating that you're smarter than everyone else and that you disbelieve in the average person's abilities." - I can see where a very integrity-concerned person such as yourself would see this as a problem. In response, allow me to direct you here: http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=16417&page=3 :How ridiculous. I care nothing about inflating my own ego: I only want to share my enthusiasm and passion for both socionics and for RPGs. I think that the messages in RPGs -- and I say this from experience -- tend to be deeper than one finds in fiction. (primarily because they are Japanese, and that indeed would seem to count for something, like as not.) Further, it is easier to "take a world in" -- and its meaning -- when you don't have to imagine it yourself. Tcaudilllg 13:54, 8 February 2008 (UTC) :Because RPGs are certainly NOT fiction. You need to actually try reading for once, boy. Video games are usually as shallow as they come compared to some of the greater novels of our time and even those prior. As for your failure imagination, no, that would be false. Being forced to imagine the world for yourself not only gets your mind working harder than simply pressing buttons at the right time (and thus able to more easily see the type of things for which you claim to have such an enthusiasm and passion), but the world you imagine will often be drastically affected by the way in which you see the characters and events of the story. 199.17.21.58 16:56, 10 February 2008 (UTC) Category:Fan Corner